DEVENDRA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Ministry of Jal Shakti, Government of India, launched the 'Jal Jeevan Mission' to provide functional water-tap connections to every household in the country by the year 2024. In turn, the State of Manipur undertook the Manipur Water Supply Project at a projected cost of Rs.3064.58 Crore with the aid and assistance of the New Development Bank (NDB), a bank established by the BRICS nations at Shanghai, China. The State of Manipur aims at establishing an Integrated Water Supply Project for Imphal Planning Area Phase-3 and supply of drinking water to 25 towns and to 1731 habitations in the rural areas of Manipur.

(2.) M/s. Devendra Construction Company, Jodhpur, the appellant partnership firm, and M/s. Keystone Infra Private Ltd., Hyderabad, the third respondent company, along with four other concerns, participated in the tender process in relation to this package. However, the appellant firm's tender was rejected at the threshold vide e-mail dtd. 24/9/2021. It was stated therein that its technical bid had been rejected during the technical evaluation by the duly constituted Committee for the reason - 'technically not qualified'. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant firm approached this Court by way of W.P(C) No.672 of 2021. Its prayer therein was to direct the authorities of the PHED, Government of Manipur, to provide reasons for rejection of its technical bid vide e-mail dtd. 24/9/2021; to provide it reasonable time to file a reply; to direct the said authorities to pass a speaking order after considering the reply and the representation filed by it, in case the decision to reject its bid still continued to hold the field; to direct the said authorities to open its financial bid in case they withdrew the e-mail dtd. 24/9/2021 and to allot the work to it in case its bid was the lowest amongst all the bidders; to grant liberty to it to challenge the speaking order passed by the authorities within ten working days from its communication, in case the decision to reject its bid continued and to direct the authorities not to finalize the bid till then; and to award costs. The appellant firm also sought interim relief by staying the finalization of the bid till disposal of the writ petition. An interim order to that effect was granted on 5/10/2021.

(3.) However, by Judgment and Order dtd. 29/10/2021, a learned Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition and vacated the interim order. On the very same day, viz., 29/10/2021, the authorities of the PHED issued a work order in favour of the third respondent company, which was declared the successful bidder. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition, the appellant firm filed this appeal on 15/11/2021. When the appeal was taken up for hearing on admission on 16/11/2021, the learned Advocate General, Manipur, informed the Court that the work order had already been issued to the successful bidder. On 17/11/2021, the learned Advocate General furnished details, stating that Work Order dtd. 29/10/2021 had been issued to M/s Keystone Infra Private Ltd., Hyderabad. Thereupon, the appellant firm filed MC(WA) No.110 of 2021 seeking to implead the successful bidder. The application was ordered on 29/11/2021 after notice was served upon the said bidder but leave was granted to it to raise objections as to such impleadment in the event of any prejudice.